Text Size

If they did, they would move quickly to amend the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008.

CPSIA, as it is known among the companies it has greatly damaged, was Congress’ response to the stories over the past two years of products arriving from China with too much lead in them, products that genuinely endangered the children who played with them. Congress got its dander up and passed strict new standards on the amount of lead allowed in products intended for children. For good measure, Congress also added bans on certain levels of phthalates in select products.

Then Congress ordered all untested goods off the shelves by Feb. 19 and imposed criminal penalties for noncompliance. And, for good measure, it allowed for private plaintiffs’ attorneys to bring lawsuits. Finally, the understaffed and overwhelmed Consumer Product Safety Commission was assigned to enforce the law.

The result has been chaos — wildly expensive, job-killing chaos — but of a nearly invisible type.

After I learned of the law’s devastating sweep — encompassing disparate products ranging from all-terrain vehicles to teething rings, baseball gloves to fishing lures — as well as the huge toll it exacted on thrift shops and small manufacturers marketing on the Web, I began to investigate more closely.

I have conducted two radio interviews with Gary Wolensky, a lawyer who represents many different major manufacturers who are struggling to comply. (The podcasts of those interviews are here and here.)

On Monday, I interviewed Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.), who is trying to get his colleagues to vote for a one-year extension of the law’s effective dates to prevent the destruction of what might become a billion dollars’ worth of wasted — and very safe — inventory. (The transcript of that interview is here.) And on my blog, I began to link to accounts from across the country of the awful cost of the unintended consequences of CPSIA’s rollout, as noted in Minneapolis’ Star Tribune on Sunday.

While a handful of papers such as the Strib and The Wall Street Journal have devoted a couple of articles to CPSIA’s march, most journalists remain wholly uninformed about it. I asked two of the Beltway bigs who come on my radio show, E.J. Dionne and Howard Fineman, if they were aware of the law, and — not surprisingly, given its very low profile — they weren’t. Most journalists don’t get down into the weeds of such controversies, but this one is different, because its cost is so staggering and the real jobs being lost and the small-to-medium businesses being crushed are so many.

Thanks for reporting this story. The only thing more disturbing than our Democratic leaders unwillingness to admit and fix the problems created when BOTH parties NEARLY UNANIMOUSLY passed the CPSIA, has been the large media outlets' unwillingness to cover it. It's a little too kind to assume they are all unaware, as I know I'm not alone in having contacted many of them myself with the information. It’s more likely a testament to the power of the lobbyists backing the CPSIA.

Worth noting a possible lone exception to the Dem's lack of will: Rep. John Dingell recently sent a letter to the CPSC about many of the disastrous problems with the CPSIA, you can read it on his website.

Let’s hope he takes it further. My home-based micro-business, Jen Lynn Designs, has closed as a result of the new, expensive testing regulations, and I’m just one, tiny example of the thousands closed, crippled and on the verge of bankruptcy as a direct result of the CPSIA.

Not to mention they are now working on a kneejerk reaction to the salmonella outbreaks - the unintended (once again, I HOPE) consequences of which may mean that you can't have your own home garden, visit a neighborhood farmers' market or go to a small non-chain restaurant because they will all be forced out of business by increased costs to comply with laws that don't make anyone any more safe. Google HR 875 and I believe there is a senate bill as well - not sure if it's quite as harsh.

Toy Industry Association (TIA), the not for profit association for North American toy manufacturers and distributors, has been consistent in our messages that the February 10 CPSIA deadlines for lead, phthalates and other restrictions could force safe toy products off retail shelves, small businesses to close their doors and jobs to be lost.

Safety is a primary concern for our industry, and toys have historically been among the safest consumer products in the marketplace. Hundreds of toy manufacturers have been making products without receiving any safety-related complaints for many years.

In mid-February, we contacted toy manufacturers/importers and retailers to collect “real” data about the impact the CPSIA is having on the industry. Nearly 400 manufacturers and importers and more than 220 retailers completed our survey. In reviewing data provided only from these respondents – and not extrapolating out to the entire industry – the new CPSIA requirements for lead and phthalates alone appear to have resulted in the following conclusions:

A $2 billion negative impact on the responding toy companies -- in excess of $1 billion worth of inventory has already been returned to manufacturers from retailers or is currently sitting in a producer’s/importer’s warehouse as non-salable or withheld for CPSIA verification before sale. Additional inventory, valued at roughly $800 million, is now in jeopardy of being returned by retailers to manufacturers, even though the product was compliant with existing safety standards at the time of production.

More than 40% of respondents indicated they would be eliminating jobs as a direct result of CPSIA requirements. Of those manufacturers, in excess of 1,200 jobs are in jeopardy of being eliminated.

Overall, the toy industry is expected to lose nearly 10% of its total retail value.

One of the most interesting aspects of this new law is the effect it's having on children's books. The CPSC actually dared to say that kids' books have only a "limited" lifespan of about 20 years. I suppose this is how they justify saying everything printed before 1985 is fit only for landfill. Where are all the libs, outraged by this book banning? They're suspiciously silent on the subject.

Unfortunately, even if HR4040 is amended - it is still a little too late. My company has already spent thousands of dollars for testing items already in inventory and even previously tested. We always tested our products to the VOLUNTARY standard of ASTM F963; however, now that standard is mandatory with additional requirements. Our safe products had to be proven safe - again, at more cost!

What is even more frustrating is the changes in how the law was interpreted by the CPSC. More money spent when it was ruled (against the CPSC's original interpretation) that phthalates would not be allowed in previously manufactured items vs. future production (after February). Thousands of dollars of inventory dumped. Our item? Something with a phthalate content of .16% vs. the limit of .1%. While I don't disagree that we need safe products, would anyone really be harmed by an item that is used for a day & then disposed of?

We will all pay for this in the long run... the cost of the tests are either paid for by the manufacturer , their factory, or split between the two. The testing costs need recovered somewhere -- generally in the price of the product. A $1000+ test cost spread over the MOQ of a low ticket item is astronomical. Either a cost increase is passed on to the ultimate consumer, or the product is dropped with lost sales (dumped inventory if it is determined not to pursue testing because of the cost -- since it is still necessary have to have passing test reports to sell in a secondary market). Lower sales and high test costs = less profit = layoffs (not only here, but globally (factories)).

You must also think about the thousands of employees affected by this law (especially small companies)who have become obsessed & stressed out over this law for the last 3 months. In my company, a few of us have spent half of our time on compliance vs. our regular duties. We've hired an attorney (yet more costs), but their help is limited - also to interpretation.

Good intentions - poor execution. Much money & jobs can still be salvaged, but as I mentioned... it's also a little late for others.

Let's not overlook the impact also on small and manufacturers of clothing and fabric items, now bound to either test or make products without buttons, snaps and zippers.

Perhaps with the mandated waste of billions of dollars of safe merchandise that cannot be sold without testing, environmental groups will get involved. Plus, their supporters are more likely to use and make the type of handmade and boutique items this law targets. Environmentalists may be the only constituents with enough clout to bend the ears of the Democratic leadership.

"If Congress can accidentally unleash such unintended and costly side effects..." Hugh should certainly understand that the acurate phrase is not "unintended;" rather, "intended but not admitted." He himself makes the point exactly, a couple graphs later: "Not a single sponsor of CPSIA is defending the law or asserting that it was intended to work this way. But nor are any of them doing anything to introduce and push through the simple fixes that are necessary."

When consequences are as clearly and consistently at variance with expressed intent as we see with the left which is now in control in DC, then actual intent must be evaluated by the consequences themselves: job loss plays perfectly into the state-building agenda of the political left.

In their view, crushing freer markets - including the destruction of private jobs - is a victory for the growth of government, not a problem for the economy.

If the current administration cared about jobs, they would cut out "mark to market" accounting and cut the corporate tax rate to at least 25% so we could be competitive with other countries around the world. The democrats in the house and senate must feel some urge to jump over the cliff for the president. It does prove that Democrats can't help themselves, when it comes to tax and spend. Oh, and by the way, where is "Code Pink" at the hearings on the WAR? Their conspicuous absence just proves they were nothing more than a front group for the democrats and could have cared less about stopping the war in Iraq or anywhere else.